Tony called it - my god Chelsea, screwing the back screen around on the bitumen, while opening up the lens mount straight up??!! I was definitely triggered! On another note, this was a great review, picking up the differences in sports focussing, and pointing out the TC 1.4 issue was great, love your work!
I hate it when reviewers just put a body on a wall or rough surface and risk scratching it! But Tony and Chelsea skip brands very regularly so probably don’t care about their kit condition. Do KEH sell preowned RUclipsr kit for a premium maybe? 😂
...even with 1080p res, watching Tony & Chelsea's video already satisfy my eyes. The color, the depth, the audio, everything top notch.... Keep your awesome works forever, guys....warm regards from Jakarta
I owned the 100-400 GM and I can tell you, the 70-200 GM2 with TC2x perform at 400/5.6 with same image quality and AF performance. So I sold my old 70-200 and 100-400 under switch to the new 70-200 + TC.
Thanks for the tips. you could improve your sports simulation if you have multiple people running in different directions to see how well the camera can lock on to the subject. One person running towards the camera is a track and field simulation.
That's more a test of the subject tracking abilities of the camera body. I agree the focusing test could be more complex but we also need it to be consistent across multiple runs and it was sufficient to show a big difference.
I have used Sigma and find the quality outstanding. Just a word about KEH. I was surprised when KEH gave me more than 50 percent for my R5. I still get a dopamine high thinking about it.
I recently bought the brand new Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 DG DN OS | Sport Sony FE mount, but unfortunately it keeps making relatively audible noises when it is connected to the camera and the camera is on. The noise is comparable to when an external hard drive is connected to a laptop and you click through the files. In other words, like when an external hard drive is running. The noises are similar. If I turn off the image stabilisation switch on the lens, the noise is just the same. Even if I don't press the camera's shutter release button halfway, the noises are audible. They are permanently audible, regardless of whether I am taking photos. Can someone please give me some feedback as to whether this is normal with this lens. I would hate to have bought a defective lens for so much money. Many thanks in advance.
@@SebastianWorldwide probably the lens stabilizer. There are high voltage components inside to focus and stabilize heavy glass. If it works then you'd be fine. Sony's body stabilizers are noisy, "ssm" lenses are audible, etc. Nothing is perfect.
Everyone is mentioning the teleconverter "problem." But how much of a problem is this? The Sony lens plus a TC will cost $3350, that's $1850 more than the Sigma lens. For less than the difference, you can buy a Sony f4 100-400mm lens (remember, w/the TC, the 2.8 lens becomes a 5.6 lens, so you're gaining a stop of light with the f4), or a Sigma 150-600mm DG DN OS Sports (and gain an extra 200mm, while still having a focal length very close to the 140mm at the short range of the Sony 100-200 with the TC), and in either case 1.) save money; 2.) add more overall flexibility to your kit; and 3.) probably not make any compromise in IQ, because a TC will invariably rob even the best lens of some IQ (the IQ of the Sigma 150-600 lens may even surpass the IQ of the Sony 100-200 w/a TC). Sure, there are negatives too, but I'm not going to sweat not having a TC to run with my Sigma and Tamron lenses (and I have a Sigma 150-600mm lens, so i have the 200-400mm focal range covered already).
New firmware from Sigma: Ver.02 2024.04.18 ・The operational noise during video recording has been reduced. ・Compatibility with continuous shooting of up to approximately 120 frames per second has been added for the focus modes (AF-S/DMF/MF) on Sony α9 III cameras.
Well, I would say on pixelpeeping level, even through RUclips compression which tend to wash out differences, Sony is noticably sharper. Give them the credit. Sigma is amazing as always, great choice as always for anyone who dont mind to have arbitrary limited framerate and its possible the autofocus accuracy will improve with firmware updates in the future. One more note on autofocus accuracy - as most important for consumers cameras - whole A7 line (with all variations of it) if im not mistaken is capped at 10 compressed raw, dropping further to some 7 or 8 uncompressed, is hit rate better at those speeds? Could you concider tests on those slower rates in future sony lens reviews? I mean it (as well as most other 3rd party fullframe lenses) is probably aimed more towards that market concidering both artificial framerate drop on 3rd party lenses on Sony bodies and price point of Sigma.
I was going to say the same thing but then I noticed it's because they didn't wait for the loading. 6:10 Sigma vs 6:13 Sigma - a huge difference (based on 6:10 not full loading yet).
@@dogpadogpa I have noticed that one right away, it was too big difference there at first glance, inconsistent with previous ahots. Also subject have different size, which makes it harder to compare. But look at 3:25 or 5:04 no loading issue there, still Sony is noticably sharper. I mean, its not huge difference and you wont notice it without directly comparing them, pixel peeping and actively looking for differences, but Sony looks to be consistently sharper.
My thoughts exactly! Sony is obviously sharper, I was surprised Tony couldn't notice it. Sigma is great, but too heavy for me, and since Sony GM2 is out of my reach, I suppose I will buy Tamron 70-180 G2.
OK, this late and a bit off topic but nevertheless; the Sigma 70 -200 mm f2.8 "Sport" for mirrorless is an entirely different lens from the same lens for DSLR mount.! The DSLR version is a full pound heavier, with an 82mm filter thread. It also won't couple to my D7200 without extreme body correction (18 points out of 20). Since this Sigma is on a Nikon, the zoom ring rotates "backwards". Yes, it's built like a tank, but did I mention it's heavy? (4pounds). It's impressive though. In fact, I'm so impressed with it, I just had my 20+ year old Nikkor 80 -200 f2.8D (two touch screwdriver) rebuilt. This so I can carry it around, and leave the Sigma at home to impress my closet. Oddly, people used to complain about the Nikkor's weight of about 3 pounds. 😕 I know, I know, DSLR is "obsolete". But I have a body for every one of my lenses. Accordingly, I don't have to grind my viewing screen in the middle of the road to change lenses on the fly. Being a Luddite does have some perks.
Firstly, I have purchased a lot of lenses, accessories, and cameras over the course of 25 years through KEH (ever since I found them when I moved to Georgia ), and I have nothing but praise for them. Secondly, I use a Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 Sport in EF mount on my Canon R7 and love it. I have no problems with using it with teleconverters with like you described with the Sony. I especially like using this lens with a Metabones SpeedBooster which makes the lens shoot about like a 77-220mm with the brightness of an f2.
For me the deal-breakers are the inability of the Sigma to do 20fps on my A9, or 30fps on my A1, or 120fps on a A9III, and no use of TC's. I know these are Sony imposed, but still it is what it is. Cheers and thanks.
@@MuahMan top reviewers answered and showed that. The A9III puts them into a video that you run on the camera, and you select and tag the ones you want, no sweat. Cheers
Great comparison video but I've had a terrible experience with KEH Camera. I sent them a bunch of gear to sell and they lost it. Took months to finally get paid.
I would like to know how this new Sigma compares to the Sony 70-200 2.8 GM I. Should be of the Same price right? Besides the sharpness improvements would the GM 1 be better in terms of focus speed for Sports.
Very good comparison. I was planing to buy the Sony 70-200 II on Black Friday. As the Sigma 70-200 was announced I wasn't shure any more. Thanks to your comparison I will now opt for the Sony lens. I would have appreciated if you would have take also pictures of a running dog to see the performance of the animal eye AF as well as the AF performance over all for very fast moving subjects. Thumbs up for you review. And fortunately you finally have an interesting sponsor for your videos.
Do you know of any Black Friday / Cyber Monday deals coming out for the Sony 2.8 70-200mm? Looking to buy one myself but not sure where to buy it from.
@@blusky1107 In Germany the Sony 70-200 f/2.8 I (old version) is on sale. Until now I haven't seen the Sony 70-200 f/2.8 II (new version) on sale. Maybe on Cyber Monday.
Only on some shots the Sony with slightly more detail. As well it should do based on the price. The internal parts will decide how these zoom lens stay the course. Guessing Sigma more sturdy judging by its heavy duty size. Not in favour of white colour on Sony.
9:24 Did you notice Tony's head is a gimbal while running? His head is almost steady like chicken head while his whole body was moving left and right, up and down. 😅🤣
I would like to see the sports focus test done at the A1 medium setting. I want to know if the Sigma would get more in focus shots if the settings matched the lens max focus speed.
Sigma will never make a lens as good as Sony for sports. Third party manufacturers have to make their lenses cost less or everyone will just buy the first part lenses. Sigma does not compromise on image quality, but they do compromise on focus speed and accuracy. I read somewhere that the Sony 70-200 has twice as many focus motors as the Sigma. That adds a lot of cost, but it is necessary for the ridiculously fast and accurate focusing the Sony lens can perform. Sony is not gouging with the price of their lenses, and Sigma could probably make a lens as good as the Sony, but it would cost the same.
@@TonyAndChelsea Yes, I understand that. I know with the Sigma 100-400mm and the a9ii if I slow the camera down to 15fps from 20fps I get a 95% keeper rate. If I set is at 20fps I only get a 50% keeper rate, The lens is the bottleneck but, I get 95 out of 100 shots at the slower a9II setting vs 50 out of 100 at the 20fps setting. For some reason I get way better in focus frames at the slower speed yet way more total in focus shots.
This is a dumb question. I’ve been shooting for years now but one thing I’ve yet to think about, to autofocus capability, does it depend on the lens or the body? I shoot with Leica 24-70 and it’s just so slow to focus, body is Leica SL2-s. Would it focus just like how it is focusing with you right now if I use the L-mount Sigma?
I have not been taking many pictures this last year or two aside from a local airshow in which i shot about 10K pictures over the weekend. I miss it, got lots of exercise with it which can't be replaced easily. I love your videos, i forgot how much fun you have together. Wishing you both all the best. Cheers from PEI Canada.
Yeah but they both missed the eyes sometimes. I have to show an example, but the spoken summary I provide is my overall experience from analyzing many images.
I don't understand how your use of an extension tube reveals anything about focus breathing? You extended the flange focal distance of both lenses, and saw a corresponding increase in magnification, which is the expected and intended effect of extension tubes, and would be the same for any lens, even that Nikon you mentioned (I assume the VRII model from 2009) would have seen an increase in magnification with the extension tube. I am unsure how the use of an extension tube is evidence of "the effect of focal shrinking at work", and even more, am confounded that your description of either lens as having "moderately serious focal shrinking" when the images shown actually demonstrate nothing except the expected increase in magnification from the extension tubes. What differences were you expecting to see between lenses, and why was just shooting them at the same subject distance and comparing magnifications (without using extension tubes) not the easiest way to compare focus breathing performance?
Focus breathing can happen as the lens elements move into their "close focusing" configuration. The change in the relative positions of the lens elements causes the focus breathing, as they move into their close focus configuration. Using an extension tube allows the lens to focus using it's "far focusing" configuration, eliminating a known cause of focus breathing. The Sony 200-600mm lens is notorious for "zooming out" as you focus close. At minimum focus distance, it shoots like a 300mm lens. Using extension tubes with it results in a significantly tighter field of view.
Love your videos! Hopefully I’m getting a a9ii soon and looking at both of these lenses. What’s the comparison between the Sigma and the Sony previous model?
Tamron 35-150 is an absolutely superb lens. While it is heavier than the Sony 70-200 GM II, it is still lighter and more convenient than carrying a 70-200 and a 24-70. The Tamron does focus a "tiny" bit slower when zooming compared to the GM II. The Tamron's loss of 51-200mm is noticed sometimes but the image quality is simply fantastic within its focal range.
You can’t see the difference? I saw this video on my new iPhone 15 pro max and could clearly see the difference the Sony is sharper, the sigma is a close second if they’re the same, if they are the same something is wrong with my iPhone
I recently bought the brand new Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 DG DN OS | Sport Sony FE mount, but unfortunately it keeps making relatively audible noises when it is connected to the camera and the camera is on. The noise is comparable to when an external hard drive is connected to a laptop and you click through the files. In other words, like when an external hard drive is running. The noises are similar. If I turn off the image stabilisation switch on the lens, the noise is just the same. Even if I don't press the camera's shutter release button halfway, the noises are audible. They are permanently audible, regardless of whether I am taking photos. Can someone please give me some feedback as to whether this is normal with this lens. I would hate to have bought a defective lens for so much money. Many thanks in advance.
Isn't focal shrinking a desired feature? I always find the subject getting smaller at 70mm as I get closer is an invaluable feature. At close range, I can always fill the subject in frame but not the other way if the focal shrinking isn't there.
Curious about your opinions. I currently own the Sony a7R IV A. Should I buy the Sony 70-200mm GM II or the Sony a7R V + Sigma 70-200mm? The a7R V + Sigma option will cost me approx. €350,- more.
@@Ausknutz You're not actually, "increasing the focal length". (Not completely explained in video), When you move the lens away from the sensor, its projected image circle is larger. Keep in mind when you move the lens farther away from the camera"s focal plane, you lose its ability to focus at infinity. At one time, a set of extension tubes was pretty standard for macro photography. Assuming manual exposure protocols, a 50 mm f2.0 lens on a 50 mm extension tube will expose as an f4.0. So, it "sort of acts like a teleconverter", but it really isn't one. A teleconverter imposes itself at what would be the actual image plane of the sensor, and then magnifies it onto the sensor. Doing it that way preserves the lens's entire focusing range
I can clearly see the difference in your examples in the video. Sony is sharper. The Sigma is good but the Sony looked better. You can see the different in the shines on your face, I can see your pores clearly with the Sony and the Sigma the details are a little soft in the same shot.
The inability to use teleconverters and the limit of 15fps are two things Sony handicaps third-party lenses with. I guess they are afraid that third-party lenses will actually match, or come very close to their lenses, but will be significantly less expensive. So instead of making lenses that can stay ahead of the competition and allow consumers to decide if they want to pay much more for the slightly superior Sony lens, they hamstring third-party lenses to look less appealing. I don’t think any other camera makers do that, just Sony. That says a lot about their confidence in staying ahead of the competition, with regard to lenses at least, when they don’t allow a level playing field.
If I see how Chelsea is changing the lenses, putting the camera unprotected on the ground, I hope I won't get used gears from you via KEH or someone else. 😉😉
Sorry, I am not rude but she has to learn how to change the lens with no damage the body, check time 2:47, it's like a horror movie and calmly she said "it's fine!" but it's not
I think there's some more testing required for using extension tubes to test focus breathing. I've seen other reviewers rack focus through the whole range with this lens and not show much focus breathing. See Christopher Frost's video at 3:30. I think a good test to see whether extension tubes change the field of view is by shooting a test chart on a prime with and without an extension tube at the same distance.
Your data is not clear. In the previous video,(sony 70-200 f/2.8 GM2 vs sony 70-200 f4 GII Macro),Sony lenses achieved 89% correct focus. now it seems like 96-97% The sigma appears to be at 52%
Dear Tony, Namaste 🙏 from India. Loved all your videos. But can you please continue the camera tutorials which would be really useful for people who buy their new camera waiting to learn about it. Thanks a lot in advance 🙏🙏🙏🙏
@TonyAndChelsea IMO&E, one of the KEY advantages of owning and lugging around a good, fast 70-200mm zoom is the VERSATILITY of being able to use it with 1.4x or 2x Teleconverters (when needed) and still maintain relatively good IQ and AF performance. With the Sigma not being able to use Teleconverters on the Sony E-mount cameras, it's really like being stuck driving your high-end performance car in bumper-to-bumper traffic and city streets. However, AFAIK, you CAN use Teleconverters with this Sigma on at least some of the L-mount camera bodies, no? On another note, due to the relative price differences, I would expect that few will be purchasing a $6k A9 III and then combine it with the relatively much lower priced Sigma. So, with that said, I feel that you should have tested the AF performance between the two lenses on a more price- & performance-matched Alpha 7-series body, as that is how I believe the majority of Sony shooters who are considering this Sigma lens will be using them.
Used to be OEM lenses were always better because there were maybe 10 optical glass makers in the world, and they made the glass in obscenely expensive platinum kilns. All the Vivitar, Soligar, Tamron, had to buy whatever the OEMs would make and sell to them: inferior glass. So has that changed? Canon, Nikon, Konica, Minolta, Leica...and I don't remember who else made their own glass.
I think their "mini cans" are 8 ounces. They're also more expensive (compared by quantity), than the 12 packs of 12 ounce cans. (I know what you're thinking, and it doesn't make sense to me either).
Jogging along the beach is not a sports test! For a lens dubbed 'Sports' the lower price tag is irrelevant if the Sony has superior AF. Any action photographer will pay more for glass that delivers.
I love my Sigma 150-600. Beautiful photos but for action on the A1, it's not great. Same with this lens it seems. I love the Sony 70-200 GM II and often shoot 30FPS for action. Regardless, the Sigma still looks great!
At Minute 5:03 ! ...how can you say there would be no difference between the 2 shots ? If you look again... you will see that there is a huge difference: The Eyelashes at SONY are razor sharp and at the Sigma...not even in focus...you can hardly see them with the SIGMA...they are like blurred shadows. On the next image they are better but still worse than the SONY... Didn't you focus right or is the SIGMA not able to show sharp Eyelashes? seems like you slipped over the samples without even checking them, but already written the text ...and just read it. I would like to know what the problem at 5:03 was?...(general problem with SIGMA or defocussed bad sampleimage?) To save that money one needs to know... thanks
wow i got some very different results in continuous AF. I shot all the moto images on the pre-production lens and I was getting FAR better hit rate than what you were getting . Not sure what happened there
![Felix "Unfair" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Oswujxm2Ag0/mqdefault.jpg)
Tony called it - my god Chelsea, screwing the back screen around on the bitumen, while opening up the lens mount straight up??!! I was definitely triggered! On another note, this was a great review, picking up the differences in sports focussing, and pointing out the TC 1.4 issue was great, love your work!
lol - triggered here too
"It's fine!" as my blood pressure skyrockets...
I hate it when reviewers just put a body on a wall or rough surface and risk scratching it! But Tony and Chelsea skip brands very regularly so probably don’t care about their kit condition. Do KEH sell preowned RUclipsr kit for a premium maybe? 😂
What we learned from this video is, if you're buying from KEH, make sure the equipment wasn't previously owned by T&C.
my blood presure definetly went up a notch ❤️
...even with 1080p res, watching Tony & Chelsea's video already satisfy my eyes. The color, the depth, the audio, everything top notch.... Keep your awesome works forever, guys....warm regards from Jakarta
I owned the 100-400 GM and I can tell you, the 70-200 GM2 with TC2x perform at 400/5.6 with same image quality and AF performance. So I sold my old 70-200 and 100-400 under switch to the new 70-200 + TC.
The lens losing focus when zooming drove me crazy with my 35-150 Tamron. I'm so happy you mention the issue on the Sigma.
I know what you mean. Are there any other zoom lenses than the “Cinezoom” type that are really parfocal (keeping focus while zooming)?
@@abavariannormiepleb9470 I've had no issues with my 150-500 Tamron or the 70-350G. I don't have other telezooms, so I wouldn't know
Thanks for the tips. you could improve your sports simulation if you have multiple people running in different directions to see how well the camera can lock on to the subject. One person running towards the camera is a track and field simulation.
That's more a test of the subject tracking abilities of the camera body. I agree the focusing test could be more complex but we also need it to be consistent across multiple runs and it was sufficient to show a big difference.
I have used Sigma and find the quality outstanding. Just a word about KEH. I was surprised when KEH gave me more than 50 percent for my R5. I still get a dopamine high thinking about it.
I recently bought the brand new Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 DG DN OS | Sport Sony FE mount, but unfortunately it keeps making relatively audible noises when it is connected to the camera and the camera is on.
The noise is comparable to when an external hard drive is connected to a laptop and you click through the files. In other words, like when an external hard drive is running. The noises are similar. If I turn off the image stabilisation switch on the lens, the noise is just the same. Even if I don't press the camera's shutter release button halfway, the noises are audible. They are permanently audible, regardless of whether I am taking photos.
Can someone please give me some feedback as to whether this is normal with this lens. I would hate to have bought a defective lens for so much money. Many thanks in advance.
@@SebastianWorldwide probably the lens stabilizer. There are high voltage components inside to focus and stabilize heavy glass. If it works then you'd be fine. Sony's body stabilizers are noisy, "ssm" lenses are audible, etc. Nothing is perfect.
Thank you for showing us how to properly scratch your LCD screens! It makes me feel SOOOOOO much better about my handling of my gears. 😀
Everyone is mentioning the teleconverter "problem." But how much of a problem is this?
The Sony lens plus a TC will cost $3350, that's $1850 more than the Sigma lens. For less than the difference, you can buy a Sony f4 100-400mm lens (remember, w/the TC, the 2.8 lens becomes a 5.6 lens, so you're gaining a stop of light with the f4), or a Sigma 150-600mm DG DN OS Sports (and gain an extra 200mm, while still having a focal length very close to the 140mm at the short range of the Sony 100-200 with the TC), and in either case 1.) save money; 2.) add more overall flexibility to your kit; and 3.) probably not make any compromise in IQ, because a TC will invariably rob even the best lens of some IQ (the IQ of the Sigma 150-600 lens may even surpass the IQ of the Sony 100-200 w/a TC).
Sure, there are negatives too, but I'm not going to sweat not having a TC to run with my Sigma and Tamron lenses (and I have a Sigma 150-600mm lens, so i have the 200-400mm focal range covered already).
Just FYI. The 100-400 isn't F4. It's f4.5-5.6.
New firmware from Sigma:
Ver.02 2024.04.18
・The operational noise during video recording has been reduced.
・Compatibility with continuous shooting of up to approximately 120 frames per second has been added for the focus modes (AF-S/DMF/MF) on Sony α9 III cameras.
no AF-C?
Congrats on reaching 1.6M subs, *_Tony & Chelsea!_*
that lens change made me laugh. Great review as always.
Well, I would say on pixelpeeping level, even through RUclips compression which tend to wash out differences, Sony is noticably sharper. Give them the credit. Sigma is amazing as always, great choice as always for anyone who dont mind to have arbitrary limited framerate and its possible the autofocus accuracy will improve with firmware updates in the future.
One more note on autofocus accuracy - as most important for consumers cameras - whole A7 line (with all variations of it) if im not mistaken is capped at 10 compressed raw, dropping further to some 7 or 8 uncompressed, is hit rate better at those speeds? Could you concider tests on those slower rates in future sony lens reviews? I mean it (as well as most other 3rd party fullframe lenses) is probably aimed more towards that market concidering both artificial framerate drop on 3rd party lenses on Sony bodies and price point of Sigma.
Yes! I thought I was going crazy when Tony was saying they were "indistinguishable". The Sony is DEFINITELY sharper.
@@DanielBraithwaite Couldn't agree more. That said, I'd happily save the money and go with the Sigma. It's good enough, lol.
I was going to say the same thing but then I noticed it's because they didn't wait for the loading.
6:10 Sigma vs 6:13 Sigma - a huge difference (based on 6:10 not full loading yet).
@@dogpadogpa I have noticed that one right away, it was too big difference there at first glance, inconsistent with previous ahots. Also subject have different size, which makes it harder to compare. But look at 3:25 or 5:04 no loading issue there, still Sony is noticably sharper. I mean, its not huge difference and you wont notice it without directly comparing them, pixel peeping and actively looking for differences, but Sony looks to be consistently sharper.
My thoughts exactly! Sony is obviously sharper, I was surprised Tony couldn't notice it. Sigma is great, but too heavy for me, and since Sony GM2 is out of my reach, I suppose I will buy Tamron 70-180 G2.
Why is the video so dark? Brightness on my phone is high but the video is so low in light?
OK, this late and a bit off topic but nevertheless; the Sigma 70 -200 mm f2.8 "Sport" for mirrorless is an entirely different lens from the same lens for DSLR mount.! The DSLR version is a full pound heavier, with an 82mm filter thread. It also won't couple to my D7200 without extreme body correction (18 points out of 20). Since this Sigma is on a Nikon, the zoom ring rotates "backwards". Yes, it's built like a tank, but did I mention it's heavy? (4pounds). It's impressive though. In fact, I'm so impressed with it, I just had my 20+ year old Nikkor 80 -200 f2.8D (two touch screwdriver) rebuilt. This so I can carry it around, and leave the Sigma at home to impress my closet. Oddly, people used to complain about the Nikkor's weight of about 3 pounds. 😕
I know, I know, DSLR is "obsolete". But I have a body for every one of my lenses. Accordingly, I don't have to grind my viewing screen in the middle of the road to change lenses on the fly. Being a Luddite does have some perks.
Absolutely. I have it and love it. But it is heavy.
Firstly, I have purchased a lot of lenses, accessories, and cameras over the course of 25 years through KEH (ever since I found them when I moved to Georgia ), and I have nothing but praise for them.
Secondly, I use a Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 Sport in EF mount on my Canon R7 and love it. I have no problems with using it with teleconverters with like you described with the Sony. I especially like using this lens with a Metabones SpeedBooster which makes the lens shoot about like a 77-220mm with the brightness of an f2.
Thanks for that comparison. Can you please also compare vs the Tamron 70-180mm f2.8 G2!
For me the deal-breakers are the inability of the Sigma to do 20fps on my A9, or 30fps on my A1, or 120fps on a A9III, and no use of TC's. I know these are Sony imposed, but still it is what it is. Cheers and thanks.
How do you edit a burst of 120 FPS photos. NOPE! Not for me.
@@MuahMan top reviewers answered and showed that. The A9III puts them into a video that you run on the camera, and you select and tag the ones you want, no sweat. Cheers
Great comparison video but I've had a terrible experience with KEH Camera. I sent them a bunch of gear to sell and they lost it. Took months to finally get paid.
2:26 It looks like Tony has been practicing his smile in front of the mirror.😂
For me these people are only youtubers but no photographers. what do you do at 2:40 with that body??!! How place that lens to the body??!!
you're always way too careful with your stuff 😂
Thank you so much Chelsea, Thank you so much Tony for the very informative comparative review of the both lenses! Good luck!
I guess the continuous shooting accuracy will improve with an update or two
Your KEH promo code just got me an extra $50 selling my lens. You guys are the best!!
I would like to know how this new Sigma compares to the Sony 70-200 2.8 GM I. Should be of the Same price right? Besides the sharpness improvements would the GM 1 be better in terms of focus speed for Sports.
I really would like to see this comparison as well
I used both and the sigma came out sharper, and also faster on auto focusing. So I kept the Sigma, happy about my purchase
That discount code just saved me $79.88! Thank you!
The true comparison will be sigma vs the g2 tamron
I would take the Tamron - It’s cheaper, a lot lighter and perhaps sharper (Peta P review). I own the G1 70-180 and it’s great.
we need side by side direct comparison review of the two lenses with the GM in mind@@SDK2006b
The feature set says compare to the GM
price is the ultimate equalizing factor. all of the core features are there on both lenses.@@plutonium5156
Very good comparison. I was planing to buy the Sony 70-200 II on Black Friday. As the Sigma 70-200 was announced I wasn't shure any more. Thanks to your comparison I will now opt for the Sony lens. I would have appreciated if you would have take also pictures of a running dog to see the performance of the animal eye AF as well as the AF performance over all for very fast moving subjects. Thumbs up for you review. And fortunately you finally have an interesting sponsor for your videos.
Do you know of any Black Friday / Cyber Monday deals coming out for the Sony 2.8 70-200mm? Looking to buy one myself but not sure where to buy it from.
@@blusky1107 In Germany the Sony 70-200 f/2.8 I (old version) is on sale. Until now I haven't seen the Sony 70-200 f/2.8 II (new version) on sale. Maybe on Cyber Monday.
@@_xch12i5_6 Let’s hope it goes on sale. Will definitely buy it. Thanks!
Would love to the a comparison to the Tamron 70-180 G2
2:40 the two portraits you took at 102mm and 200mm - were you standing in the same spot?
Great video!!
Review coming for the Canon 200-800 or the 24-105 2.8?
Dunno what tony is talking about. The GM is sharper in the zoom in shots.
Only on some shots the Sony with slightly more detail. As well it should do based on the price. The internal parts will decide how these zoom lens stay the course. Guessing Sigma more sturdy judging by its heavy duty size. Not in favour of white colour on Sony.
9:24 Did you notice Tony's head is a gimbal while running? His head is almost steady like chicken head while his whole body was moving left and right, up and down. 😅🤣
I would like to see the sports focus test done at the A1 medium setting. I want to know if the Sigma would get more in focus shots if the settings matched the lens max focus speed.
Sigma will never make a lens as good as Sony for sports. Third party manufacturers have to make their lenses cost less or everyone will just buy the first part lenses. Sigma does not compromise on image quality, but they do compromise on focus speed and accuracy. I read somewhere that the Sony 70-200 has twice as many focus motors as the Sigma. That adds a lot of cost, but it is necessary for the ridiculously fast and accurate focusing the Sony lens can perform. Sony is not gouging with the price of their lenses, and Sigma could probably make a lens as good as the Sony, but it would cost the same.
Well it drops down to 15 fps anyway.
@@TonyAndChelsea Yes, I understand that. I know with the Sigma 100-400mm and the a9ii if I slow the camera down to 15fps from 20fps I get a 95% keeper rate. If I set is at 20fps I only get a 50% keeper rate, The lens is the bottleneck but, I get 95 out of 100 shots at the slower a9II setting vs 50 out of 100 at the 20fps setting. For some reason I get way better in focus frames at the slower speed yet way more total in focus shots.
how about filming ? and dynamic stabilisation ?
This is a dumb question. I’ve been shooting for years now but one thing I’ve yet to think about, to autofocus capability, does it depend on the lens or the body? I shoot with Leica 24-70 and it’s just so slow to focus, body is Leica SL2-s. Would it focus just like how it is focusing with you right now if I use the L-mount Sigma?
Always my favorite video’s is when Tony being sporty :)
I have not been taking many pictures this last year or two aside from a local airshow in which i shot about 10K pictures over the weekend. I miss it, got lots of exercise with it which can't be replaced easily. I love your videos, i forgot how much fun you have together. Wishing you both all the best. Cheers from PEI Canada.
Tony should ALWAYS do the running ;-)
Interested in value and performance comparisons between this Sigma, Tamron 70-180 g2, and sony 70-200 f4 "macro" g2
Sigma Teleconverter works like a charm on L-Mount ;)
We need tamron g2 vs sigma. I need to see what hits more moving subjects for sports
I just sold my Sigma 70-200 to KEH for $250. Is there a link for Sony 70-200 II to buy it?
From the images that you compared it looked as though the Sigma missed focus on the eyes several times.
Yeah but they both missed the eyes sometimes. I have to show an example, but the spoken summary I provide is my overall experience from analyzing many images.
Totally off topic but loving Tony's jacket.
Works with the Sigma TC's on L mount of course.
I don't understand how your use of an extension tube reveals anything about focus breathing? You extended the flange focal distance of both lenses, and saw a corresponding increase in magnification, which is the expected and intended effect of extension tubes, and would be the same for any lens, even that Nikon you mentioned (I assume the VRII model from 2009) would have seen an increase in magnification with the extension tube.
I am unsure how the use of an extension tube is evidence of "the effect of focal shrinking at work", and even more, am confounded that your description of either lens as having "moderately serious focal shrinking" when the images shown actually demonstrate nothing except the expected increase in magnification from the extension tubes.
What differences were you expecting to see between lenses, and why was just shooting them at the same subject distance and comparing magnifications (without using extension tubes) not the easiest way to compare focus breathing performance?
Focus breathing can happen as the lens elements move into their "close focusing" configuration. The change in the relative positions of the lens elements causes the focus breathing, as they move into their close focus configuration. Using an extension tube allows the lens to focus using it's "far focusing" configuration, eliminating a known cause of focus breathing. The Sony 200-600mm lens is notorious for "zooming out" as you focus close. At minimum focus distance, it shoots like a 300mm lens. Using extension tubes with it results in a significantly tighter field of view.
What careyly said.
Love your videos! Hopefully I’m getting a a9ii soon and looking at both of these lenses. What’s the comparison between the Sigma and the Sony previous model?
Anyone know if Sony a9III has the same diminished frame rate for third party lenses I am tyring to decide what to get that is a deal breaker for me.
What about the Tamron 35-150 f2-2.8? Would love to see your take on this lens.
Looks like singular lens that could do what a 24-70 and 70-200 can do
and the new Tamron 70-180 G2
Tamron 35-150 is an absolutely superb lens. While it is heavier than the Sony 70-200 GM II, it is still lighter and more convenient than carrying a 70-200 and a 24-70. The Tamron does focus a "tiny" bit slower when zooming compared to the GM II. The Tamron's loss of 51-200mm is noticed sometimes but the image quality is simply fantastic within its focal range.
You can’t see the difference? I saw this video on my new iPhone 15 pro max and could clearly see the difference the Sony is sharper, the sigma is a close second if they’re the same, if they are the same something is wrong with my iPhone
2:43 NOOOOOOOOOOO u cant do that :(
The focal shrinking thing, did you test it on the Tamron 70-180 2.8?
I recently bought the brand new Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 DG DN OS | Sport Sony FE mount, but unfortunately it keeps making relatively audible noises when it is connected to the camera and the camera is on.
The noise is comparable to when an external hard drive is connected to a laptop and you click through the files. In other words, like when an external hard drive is running. The noises are similar. If I turn off the image stabilisation switch on the lens, the noise is just the same. Even if I don't press the camera's shutter release button halfway, the noises are audible. They are permanently audible, regardless of whether I am taking photos.
Can someone please give me some feedback as to whether this is normal with this lens. I would hate to have bought a defective lens for so much money. Many thanks in advance.
Isn't focal shrinking a desired feature? I always find the subject getting smaller at 70mm as I get closer is an invaluable feature. At close range, I can always fill the subject in frame but not the other way if the focal shrinking isn't there.
It's definitely not desirable for a telephoto lens to become less telephoto when you zoom into the long end.
Wow the HDR on this video looks great
Curious about your opinions. I currently own the Sony a7R IV A. Should I buy the Sony 70-200mm GM II or the Sony a7R V + Sigma 70-200mm? The a7R V + Sigma option will cost me approx. €350,- more.
Do you need the extra features of the A7rv? If yes I’ll say go for that instead of the 70-200 gm ii
Tony, when you add extension tubes, you increase focal length! That's why you get higher magnification, and not due to "focus breathing" correction.
You're thinking of teleconverters.
How do you increase focal length without any optics in the extension tube?
@@Ausknutz You're not actually, "increasing the focal length". (Not completely explained in video), When you move the lens away from the sensor, its projected image circle is larger. Keep in mind when you move the lens farther away from the camera"s focal plane, you lose its ability to focus at infinity. At one time, a set of extension tubes was pretty standard for macro photography. Assuming manual exposure protocols, a 50 mm f2.0 lens on a 50 mm extension tube will expose as an f4.0. So, it "sort of acts like a teleconverter", but it really isn't one. A teleconverter imposes itself at what would be the actual image plane of the sensor, and then magnifies it onto the sensor. Doing it that way preserves the lens's entire focusing range
Hi, can you please suggest a body new or used as upgrade from my Nikon d5600 for apsc lens.
Hi Guys why did you not compare this with the Tamron G2 as well? Would be nice to get that in the mix too and hear and see your view.
Hi - could you please share what's the brand of the extension tube you use in the video? Thanks
I can clearly see the difference in your examples in the video. Sony is sharper. The Sigma is good but the Sony looked better. You can see the different in the shines on your face, I can see your pores clearly with the Sony and the Sigma the details are a little soft in the same shot.
you lost me at 2:45, what a way to handle new gears !!!👏
The inability to use teleconverters and the limit of 15fps are two things Sony handicaps third-party lenses with. I guess they are afraid that third-party lenses will actually match, or come very close to their lenses, but will be significantly less expensive. So instead of making lenses that can stay ahead of the competition and allow consumers to decide if they want to pay much more for the slightly superior Sony lens, they hamstring third-party lenses to look less appealing. I don’t think any other camera makers do that, just Sony. That says a lot about their confidence in staying ahead of the competition, with regard to lenses at least, when they don’t allow a level playing field.
If I see how Chelsea is changing the lenses, putting the camera unprotected on the ground, I hope I won't get used gears from you via KEH or someone else. 😉😉
You might, but it may be have the condition listed as "As Is".
It's cheaper than the Panasonic 70-200/2.8 so I'm getting this for my Lumix S5.
I already have a Sony 70-200 G II, one of the best lenses I have ever owned. I do love Sigma also, I have a Sigma 85mm f/1.4, a very great lens.
At min 3:37 i found that sigma s background is creamier and better than sony’s. Weird1?
how to mount follow focus and zoom ring on sigma?
can you get a thrid party teleconverter?
Sorry, I am not rude but she has to learn how to change the lens with no damage the body, check time 2:47, it's like a horror movie and calmly she said "it's fine!" but it's not
I think there's some more testing required for using extension tubes to test focus breathing. I've seen other reviewers rack focus through the whole range with this lens and not show much focus breathing. See Christopher Frost's video at 3:30. I think a good test to see whether extension tubes change the field of view is by shooting a test chart on a prime with and without an extension tube at the same distance.
Your data is not clear. In the previous video,(sony 70-200 f/2.8 GM2 vs sony 70-200 f4 GII Macro),Sony lenses achieved 89% correct focus.
now it seems like 96-97%
The sigma appears to be at 52%
They key told me coupon code is no longer valid
I am from India …..can I buy camera lens from KEH.
THe GMii is sharper for me
It's supposed to be
Yeah the GM is $60 more sharpness worth lol
Where?
There@@Bayonet1809
Please test Sony 300 mm 2.8 with 1.4 tc and Sony 6700 and a7 iv
wow, nice concrete twist there
@3:28 how can you say sharpness is the same? Minute 6:11 U call that undisguisable? U can clearly see the Sigma is NOT as sharp as the Sony!
What's up? Your finding of moderately significant focal shrinking is not supported by the Megapixel review that found no significant focal shrinking.
I dunno what to say. We showed you the testing procedure and the results.
Dear Tony, Namaste 🙏 from India. Loved all your videos. But can you please continue the camera tutorials which would be really useful for people who buy their new camera waiting to learn about it. Thanks a lot in advance 🙏🙏🙏🙏
Nothing touches OEM lens in term of quality if not price.
One gets you a 4 YEAR WARRANTY out of the box and the other, well, Sony needs to get their shit together and start offering a better warranty
I wonder how well it will perform in live concerts...
why in the world would you put the camera body on the pavement? could've at least put it on the backpack so it doesn't get scratched
is sigma parfocal?
Straight in the first comparison the eye on the Sony lens was significantly better!!!!
Looks like the sharpness on the Sony lenses will forever be superior against cheaper lenses
4:20 700mm 😂😂😂😂.... Awesome video!! 😍😍
02:47 omg so that is how I should change my lens... camera on the concrete
@TonyAndChelsea
IMO&E, one of the KEY advantages of owning and lugging around a good, fast 70-200mm zoom is the VERSATILITY of being able to use it with 1.4x or 2x Teleconverters (when needed) and still maintain relatively good IQ and AF performance.
With the Sigma not being able to use Teleconverters on the Sony E-mount cameras, it's really like being stuck driving your high-end performance car in bumper-to-bumper traffic and city streets.
However, AFAIK, you CAN use Teleconverters with this Sigma on at least some of the L-mount camera bodies, no?
On another note, due to the relative price differences, I would expect that few will be purchasing a $6k A9 III and then combine it with the relatively much lower priced Sigma.
So, with that said, I feel that you should have tested the AF performance between the two lenses on a more price- & performance-matched Alpha 7-series body, as that is how I believe the majority of Sony shooters who are considering this Sigma lens will be using them.
Used to be OEM lenses were always better because there were maybe 10 optical glass makers in the world, and they made the glass in obscenely expensive platinum kilns. All the Vivitar, Soligar, Tamron, had to buy whatever the OEMs would make and sell to them: inferior glass.
So has that changed? Canon, Nikon, Konica, Minolta, Leica...and I don't remember who else made their own glass.
Unless I'm printing wall -sized prints I'm going with the Sigma.
@Tony & Chelsea Northrup maybe I am wrong, but I think a can of coke is 12oz, not 6oz.
I think their "mini cans" are 8 ounces. They're also more expensive (compared by quantity), than the 12 packs of 12 ounce cans. (I know what you're thinking, and it doesn't make sense to me either).
Jogging along the beach is not a sports test! For a lens dubbed 'Sports' the lower price tag is irrelevant if the Sony has superior AF. Any action photographer will pay more for glass that delivers.
Please do a comparison of sigma 500mm f4
😊
I love my Sigma 150-600. Beautiful photos but for action on the A1, it's not great. Same with this lens it seems. I love the Sony 70-200 GM II and often shoot 30FPS for action. Regardless, the Sigma still looks great!
At Minute 5:03 ! ...how can you say there would be no difference between the 2 shots ? If you look again... you will see that there is a huge difference: The Eyelashes at SONY are razor sharp and at the Sigma...not even in focus...you can hardly see them with the SIGMA...they are like blurred shadows. On the next image they are better but still worse than the SONY... Didn't you focus right or is the SIGMA not able to show sharp Eyelashes? seems like you slipped over the samples without even checking them, but already written the text ...and just read it.
I would like to know what the problem at 5:03 was?...(general problem with SIGMA or defocussed bad sampleimage?) To save that money one needs to know... thanks
The phallic graffiti on the building in the opening shot made me laugh! 🤣 Thanks for the chuckles!
Gotta say this lens had me at "Hey I'm black!" as I hate White lenses personally.
wow i got some very different results in continuous AF. I shot all the moto images on the pre-production lens and I was getting FAR better hit rate than what you were getting . Not sure what happened there
Different circumstances produce different results. We're very picky about counting shots in-focus; it needs to nail the eye.
I think it might have more to do with the unpredictable nature of pre-production than anything else. ;)@@TonyAndChelsea